1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
8_murik_8 [283]
3 years ago
7

Why would firing the joint chiefs of staff look so bad for JFK even as they defy his orders?

History
2 answers:
Oliga [24]3 years ago
4 0
Firing the joint chiefs of staff would look bad for Kennedy because it would make it appear to the public that the administration is struggling/weak. Anytime there are scandals or issues in which the president does not get along with his colleagues, it is seen as a sign of weakness. During Kennedy's presidency, the last thing the United States government wanted was to appear weak. This is because the US was in constant competition with the Soviet Union for international power and influence.
Anna [14]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

Because he did not want it to appear that the country's administration was in disagreement.

Explanation:

It is expected that all those who run the country will be in agreement with each other, if this is not shown to the public the government will show a weak appearance and the president can be seen as unprepared for the position. For this reason, Kennedy did not dismiss the heads of joint team, so that his popularity, as governor, did not stop due to rumors of disagreement between the members of the administration.

You might be interested in
Why arent I virtuous?
olchik [2.2K]

Answer:

no its not

Explanation:

most people came here for answers so it's hard to find others eith the answers. So most wont be here helping others but here to find help instead

4 0
2 years ago
What was one of the primary results of Chinese civilizations settling in the river valleys?
Mekhanik [1.2K]
<span> The Fertile land and supported a food surplus </span>
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Ffgeffefefefefefefefefefe
Contact [7]

Answer:

Power divided between the state and federal government.

Explanation:

The national government would have control over the broader area of concern. The state government would have control over deciding how to handle smaller, more local, and more specific concerns within that broad area.

7 0
2 years ago
How did americans react to shays rebellion
slamgirl [31]
<span>saw it as a sign that the Articles of Confederation were not working</span>
3 0
3 years ago
I say, there is scarce any city or borough in Europe, where blood has not been spilled for religious quarrels; I say, that the h
Maurinko [17]

Answer:

.

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What US Foreign policy doctrine did bush promise to enforce
    11·2 answers
  • What crime was George William Swepson guilty of committing?
    13·2 answers
  • Which statement describes public reaction to the Brown v. Board of Education case? A. Northern school boards brought a new case
    13·2 answers
  • The Compromise of 1850 admitted California as a free state, reinforced the property rights of owners whose slaves escaped into a
    8·1 answer
  • Cyrus was able to easily conquer Babylon because
    9·1 answer
  • 1. Which of the following was the provision in the Treaty of Paris 1763? (1 point)
    11·1 answer
  • Which of the following was NOT an effect of the Industrial Revolution?
    11·1 answer
  • Questions 1-60
    13·2 answers
  • How were the first people made on earth
    8·2 answers
  • Why is Iwo Jima considered one of the bloodiest battles that occurred on the Pacific front?
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!